************************
after having seen the first a few replies, I decided to add some background info.

first vid, no editing except for DF, recording two complete games. final score: blue beat purple by 6:2
second vid, only includes HL, actually red player made lots of DFs and UEs. final score: blue beat read by 6:1

2nd guy in red: solid 4.0 to possibly low 4.5. opponent in blue shirt didn't have the weapons to expose what looked like a weak backhand side. a stronger opponent might be able to pick on this side and get a lot of short balls. blue shirt had a lot of short balls that he attempted to attack but he had almost no transition game.

Just looked at the first video and focused on Mr. blue shirt. I'd say 3.5, maybe a weak 4.0. I never saw him hit a bh (which is Mr. purple shirt's fault - good on Mr. blue shirt for being able to run around every bh), so I can't comment on this usually critical stroke. His fh and serve both have some significant technical issues, but he gets them over pretty consistently and they're effective enough.

************************
after having seen the first a few replies, I decided to add some background info.

first vid, no editing except for DF, recording two complete games. final score: blue beat purple by 6:2
second vid, only includes HL, actually red player made lots of DFs and UEs. final score: blue beat read by 6:1

Well since you were not very specific. What exactly was I wrong about? Wrong that they are loopy or wrong that they are loopy for a 4.0? My daughter's a 4.0 and does not hit loopy shots like what's in the video very often.

After watching again a 4.0 should be able to rally for more than 3 or 4 shots and you can't blame it on the guy in the blue because the red guy has a lot of unforced errors as well. My daughter's matches as a 4.0 have 10-12 ball rallies all the time and their shots are not as loopy.

Loopy does not mean they are bad... A lot of really good players hit loopy strokes.

These ratings are pretty harsh. I can't really tell how good purple is because of how short the video is.

The blue and red guy have some solid points and both consistently hit the ball pretty deep. Other than a few silly mistakes they seemed to be pretty good. Both guys have solid movement as well. Blue's footwork could use some work, but he still is pretty fast. His serve isn't the greatest, but he makes up for it in other areas.

It is hard to tell over camera, but I would say red and blue are at least solid 4.0 and my gut tells me closer to 4.5.

Edit : Just read that these were the highlights... You can't really tell how good people are based on highlights. I would say both would fall in 4.0 then if they had a lot of points with errors.

Watched the second video. Mr. Red Shirt has some decent strokes. bh slice was the weakest thing I saw. The biggest issue is that he just seems to be walking over to a number of his strokes. I realize that with all of the moon balls it takes forever and a day for the ball to get over the net, but he needs to take the set-up seriously. That should help reduce the UFEs. The other thing for Mr. Red Shirt is to use the whole court on both sides. Make Mr. Blue Shirt hit some bhs, hit short and bring Mr. Blue Shirt in and then pass him or lob him. And he can come in himself a lot more. Push Mr. Blue Shirt back on the bh side, come in, and hit the volley or the overhead. It doesn't appear that Mr. Blue Shirt would have an answer to a deep ball the bh and Mr. Red Shirt up at the net other than to lob.

Mr. Red Shirt has the better strokes. If he can cut down the UFEs and DFs, and develop a strategy he should be able beat Mr. Blue Shirt.

The level thing is so hard to do because while the strokes look like a solid 4.0, if he can't beat the Mr. Blue Shirt then he's not there yet.

Perhaps but shouldn't the fact that there are no rallies longer than 4 shots tell us something about their play? The 4.0 players I see on an almost daily basis rally for 10-12 or more shots consistently.

Perhaps but shouldn't the fact that there are no rallies longer than 4 shots tell us something about their play? The 4.0 players I see on an almost daily basis rally for 10-12 or more shots consistently.

Click to expand...

pretty sure the number of balls hit depends on the match-up of playing styles. There are s&v-ers who have success at many different competitive levels, and rallies are few and far in between regardless of level.

pretty sure the number of balls hit depends on the match-up of playing styles. There are s&v-ers who have success at many different competitive levels, and rallies are few and far in between regardless of level.

Click to expand...

But they are not serve and volleying in the video. They are just missing a lot.

Another pointless exercise. The rating is not for gymnastics or figure skating. It does not matter what your form looks like. Only thing that matters is whether or not you are competitive against other computer rated players. All this discussion amount to jack squat. If you want a rating go out and play.

USTA 4.5 leagues around here consists of a lot of former college players and current teaching pros. In spite of the "Rising mental toughness" of these players, they wouldn't know what hit them. It wouldn't be remotely competitively.

When I was on the mens 4.5 tour my agent would sit in the stands and listen to what others would say about me. Some would mock my mental instabilities. Others would prognosticate on my eventual rise to 4.5 GOAThood.

My favorites were:

1. He's as cool as ice - like Borg
2. He's a basket case
3. He just broke the new Sampras 88 racquet on the net post.
4. That guy is not a 3.5
5. He's wearing Nike - he must be solid.
6. He's a head case
7. He will never be a rising 5.0
8. He has a Sampras 6 pack GOAT bag
9. If you call out close balls he will scream and wig out and surely lose
10. He has spider veins on his cankles - I wonder if he's anemic